Download US Climate Engagement - Skoll Global Threats Fund

What does the climate engagement landsc
ook like? What motivators do NGOs use
o engage people on climate and energy
ssues? How are climate impacts framed
n climate communications efforts? What
hould climate engagement efforts do to
build political will for climate action? Wha
polls and surveys say about what America
believe about climate change? What does
he social science literature say about wh
drives public opinion on climate change?
What does the climate community say abo
what drives public engagement on climate
change? How do
NGOs use
A Discussion
Piecepolling and soc
cience in their outreach and advocacy?
How could social science be used to help
trengthen climate engagement efforts?
What are constraints for enhancing the us
of social science research and methods to
trengthen climate engagement? What are
opportunities for enhancing the use of soc
February
2013
cience
research
and methods to strength
Prepared by the Skoll Global Threats Fund
climate
engagement? What does the clima
engagement landscape look like? What mo
Taking Stock
U.S. Climate Engagement
Taking Stock of Climate
Engagement
Over the past few months, the Skoll Global Threats Fund undertook research and
commissioned a number of studies to better understand the current state of public
engagement around climate change in the United States. The goal was to explore how
the philanthropic sector could empower a more targeted, effective, and evidence-based
approach to public engagement on climate. This document is an overview of what we
heard and what we learned.
Our intent here is not to assess the campaign strategies and tactics that the climate
movement has pursued. There have been many assessments of strategy and reflections
on why we have been unable to pass comprehensive climate policy. Rather, we sought
to characterize the approaches being used to engage people on climate change, and
we began to explore how social science research and tools could strengthen these
engagement efforts.
Amy Luers
Director, Climate Change
Skoll Global Threats Fund
[email protected]
We have chosen to focus on climate engagement because we see it as central to building
the political will required for action. Today, most Americans believe climate change is
real and at least partly human-caused. Yet few Americans are engaged around climate
change—cognitively, emotionally, or behaviorally, let alone politically. Over the last few
months, we began investigating what social scientists and outreach specialists understand
about how we can more effectively engage the public. We found many NGOs, funders,
and analysts are exploring similar questions as they rethink priorities and approaches to
mobilize the masses, activate the elite, and motivate decision makers.
This discussion piece is an attempt to capture the conversation underway and facilitate
further discussion about how social science can help build a stronger path forward.
2
1
This discussion piece draws on input from advocates, funders, and researchers across
the climate community. We spoke with dozens of individuals, representing over
40 organizations. Thank you to everyone who spoke with us and helped us better
understand the U.S. climate engagement landscape. Organizations whose representatives
we consulted in this assessment include:
350.org
Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research
Alliance for Climate Education
Greenpeace
American Lung Association
League of Conservation Voters
Analyst Institute
MacArthur Foundation
Breakthrough Institute
National Academy of Sciences
California Academy of Sciences
National Center for Science Education
Carnegie Mellon University,
Department of Social & Decision Sciences
National Religious Partnership for the Environment
Catalist
Cater Communications
Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of
Public & International Affairs
Citizen Engagement Lab
R Street
Climate Access
The Regeneration Project
Climate Central
Sea Change Foundation
Climate Communication
Sierra Club
Climate Nexus
Sojourners
The Climate Reality Project
Stanford University,
Woods Institute for the Environment
Drexel University,
Department of Culture & Communication
Eco-Accountability Project
ecoAmerica
Energy and Enterprise Initiative
Energy Foundation
Environment America
Environmental Defense Fund
2
Natural Resources Defense Council
Union of Concerned Scientists
University of Southern California, Annenberg School
for Communication, The Norman Lear Center
U.S. Climate Action Network
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
World Resources Institute
Yale Law School, The Cultural Cognition Project
Table of Contents
Q1. What does the climate engagement landscape look like?4
Q2. What motivators do NGOs use to engage people on climate and
energy issues?6
Q3. How are climate impacts framed in communication efforts? 8
Q4. What should the climate engagement community do to build
political will for climate action? 10
Q5. What do polls and surveys say about what Americans believe
about climate change?14
Q6. What does the social science literature say about what drives
public opinion on climate change? 16
Q7. What does the public engagement community say about what
drives opinion on climate change? 18
Q8. How do NGOs use polling and social science in their outreach
and advocacy?20
Q9. How can social science help strengthen climate engagement
efforts? 21
Q10. What are constraints to using social science to strengthen
climate engagement?
22
George Mason University,
Center for Climate Change Communication
Q11. What are opportunities for using social science to strengthen
climate engagement? 24
The Skoll Global Threats Fund assumes full responsibility for any errors or
misrepresentations in this document.
Sources and Methods26
3
Figure 1. Climate Engagement Landscape
Q1
What does the climate
engagement landscape
look like?
We refer to the climate engagement community as the group of organizations who
analyze and/or communicate the risks of or solutions to climate change, with the
ultimate goal of building a more informed, concerned, or active population. In Figure
1 we mapped where organizations fit on a continuum from research and analysis to
outreach and advocacy, and on a continuum depending on whether they engage the
grassroots or the grasstops. The bullets below share some of the findings from our
research.
Key highlights:
• More resources and organizations focus on engaging the grasstops than the
grassroots.
• Most of the organizations working at the grassroots are small, while those working
at the grasstops tend to be significantly larger.
• Outside of specific state and regional policy battles, most resources are directed
toward influencing the climate narrative in Washington, D.C.
• Most research and analysis focuses on defining solutions or on making the case
for action. Few analytic resources support investigating and tracking the social and
political opportunities for action.
• Much of the research and analysis conducted is disconnected from the grassroots
campaigns.
• Most outreach and advocacy is led by green-branded organizations.
Organizations with smaller climate and energy budgets are shown with numbers:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
350.org
American Council on Renewable
Energy
Bipartisan Research Center
Care USA
Center for Clean Air Policy
Center for Climate Strategies
Center for Resource Solutions
Center on Budget & Policy
Priorities
CERES
Church World Service
Clean Air - Cool Planet
Climate Central
Climate Nexus
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
Climate Science Watch
Climate Solutions
Defenders of Wildlife
Ducks Unlimited
Environment America
Fresh Energy
Greenpeace
Interstate Renewable Energy
Council
NAACP
Northeast Energy Efficiency
Partnerships
Oceana
Oxfam America
Regulatory Assistance Project
27. Resource Media
28. Smart Power
29. Southeast Energy Efficiency
Alliance
30. Southern Alliance for Clean Energy
31. Southern Environmental Law
Center
32. TckTckTck
33. The Brookings Institute
34. The Climate Group
35. The Climate Institute
36. The Regeneration Project
37. U.S. Climate Action Network
38. Western Resource Advocates
39. Wilderness Society
This is our take on how the largest NGOs (based on climate and energy budgets)
are working to motivate action on climate. The placement of each group was
determined based our own knowledge, input from others in the climate community,
and from looking at each organization’s website. This is intended to capture the
general distribution of how the community’s efforts are focused. See Sources and
Methods for complete description.
4
Q2
Figure 2. Motivators for Climate and Energy Engagement
What motivators do NGOs
use to engage people on
climate and energy issues?
We identified three broad categories of ‘motivators,’ or communications frames,
that NGOs use to engage the public to take action on climate issues: (1) Dirty
energy is harmful; (2) clean energy brings benefits; and (3) the consequences of
continued climate change are severe. Figure 2 characterizes the degree to which each
organization uses these three motivators in their engagement and communications.
Key highlights:
• Most of the larger groups use multiple motivators in their engagement work.
• Many of the research and analysis organizations focus on clean energy benefits
and avoid talking about climate change.
• Conservation groups generally emphasize the risks of climate impacts.
• Most of the grassroots-focused groups emphasize the harm of dirty energy and the
risks of climate impacts.
Organizations with smaller climate and energy budgets are shown with numbers:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
350.org
American Council on Renewable
Energy
Bipartisan Research Center
Care USA
Center for Clean Air Policy
Center for Climate Strategies
Center for Resource Solutions
Center on Budget & Policy
Priorities
CERES
Church World Service
Clean Air - Cool Planet
Climate Central
Climate Nexus
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
Climate Science Watch
Climate Solutions
Defenders of Wildlife
Ducks Unlimited
Environment America
Fresh Energy
Greenpeace
Interstate Renewable Energy
Council
NAACP
Northeast Energy Efficiency
Partnerships
Oceana
Oxfam America
Regulatory Assistance Project
27. Resource Media
28. Smart Power
29. Southeast Energy Efficiency
Alliance
30. Southern Alliance for Clean Energy
31. Southern Environmental Law
Center
32. TckTckTck
33. The Brookings Institute
34. The Climate Group
35. The Climate Institute
36. The Regeneration Project
37. U.S. Climate Action Network
38. Western Resource Advocates
39. Wilderness Society
We classified NGOs based on which motivators they predominantly used for their
climate and energy work. We based this judgment on our knowledge, input from
others in the community, and reading organizations’ websites. See Sources and
Methods for complete description.
6
Q3
How are climate impacts
framed in communication
efforts?
Figure 3. How NGOs Frame Climate Impacts
The most commonly used frames for communicating climate impacts can be divided
into two broad categories – those that target the rational mind and those that target the
heart. The rational arguments highlight that the costs of inaction outweigh the costs of
action. The heart-based arguments appeal to a basic sense of right and wrong. Figure 3
illustrates the climate community’s emphasis within each of these frames.
Key highlights:
• Most resources and efforts are placed towards the economic and health costs of
climate change.
• In recent years, much of the climate impacts framing has been focused on the
economic and health costs around extreme weather.
• Relatively few organizations emphasize national security, and those that do have
relatively small budgets.
• Most organizations integrate impacts on nature in their communication.
We classified NGOs according to the dominant frames they use to communicate
climate impacts. Names have been removed in order to highlight where the
community is, as opposed to where individual groups are. Note that this figure
includes more organizations than shown in Figures 1 and 2 (it includes organizations
with estimated climate and energy budgets under $2M, which were excluded from
the first graphics). Also, many organizations appear in both of the above Venn
diagrams. See Sources and Methods for complete description.
8
Voices from the Community
Q4
What should the climate
engagement community do to
build political will for climate
action? (1 of 2)
Be open to alternative
voices and solutions.
“Be open to non-left-wing public policies
… To date, nearly all proposals with serious
environmental support have been heavily
influenced by other portions of the political left as
well as various rent-seeking interest groups ranging
from unions to nuclear power companies. This, to
me and many other conservatives, indicates bad
faith in the discussion...”
– Eli Lehrer, President, R Street
“Change the conversation from capping, trading,
regulating and growing government to a free
enterprise ‘true cost’ competition between fuels
that’s pro-innovation and pro-growth and that does
not grow the government.”
–Bob Inglis, former U.S. Representative for
South Carolina’s 4th congressional district
“PROGRESSIVES have ceded too much to the Right
— we are FOR families and FOR free enterprise
and FOR comfort and convenience and FOR
responsibility and hard work. Each of these issues
can and should be woven into climate messaging.”
– Cathy Zoi, former Assistant Secretary of Energy and former
CEO of the Alliance for Climate Protection
Target communication
campaigns and
consider the tribes.
“There are a lot of communication efforts to ‘raise
public awareness,’ etc. But what is the reason for
doing this? How do the communication efforts fit
into a larger political strategy? It might be better
to do targeted communication efforts centering
on voter decision making … We know that the
biggest impact on public concern levels are
statements from elite opinion leaders … a welldesigned communications/political response would
target communication efforts at [the elite opinion
leaders].”
– Robert Brulle, Professor, Drexel University,
Department of Culture & Communication
“When people talk and think, they often do so in
terms of issues and values. But when they decide
and act, they do that tribally. For most Americans
we need to connect climate with tribes that they
belong to and trust.”
– Robert Perkowitz, President, ecoAmerica
Tell the truth,
accept unknowns,
and expose lies.
Activate and guide
citizens who are already
concerned.
“Many climate change skeptics say
incorrect or misleading things. This doesn’t
give people concerned about climate
change the right to be equally dishonest
… Acknowledging unknowns is simply a
matter of basic honesty, not a surrender.”
“I think plenty of people are concerned, but don’t have any
real sense of how to act on a scale that matters. They get that
personal changes don’t add up, but they don’t see what else
to do. The job of movements is to provide that ‘what else.’”
– Eli Lehrer, President, R Street
“Confront the disinformation campaign
more directly by exposing its sources,
tactics and goals, [and] develop strategies
designed specifically to counter-act
disinformation.”
– Riley Dunlap, Chair, American Sociological
Association’s Task Force on Sociology and Global
Climate Change
– Bill McKibben, Founder, 350.org
“Inspiring people who are already deeply personally
concerned about climate change to join in sustained,
coordinated activities would be very effective in creating real
pressure on legislators.”
– Jon Krosnick, Professor of Communication, Political Science, &
Psychology, Stanford University
“Find ways to activate the ‘alarmed’ - the issue public … who
already care deeply about this issue. All of them express their
desire for change through their consumer purchases, but only
about 25% express themselves as citizens by contacting their
elected and appointed officials.”
– Edward Maibach, Professor, George Mason University and Director,
Center for Climate Change Communication
Acknowledge that it is NOT just about
the science.
“Acknowledge that science is only an input to policy making: Science, by its very nature, can illuminate areas in
which public policy ought to be made but, at least in a democracy, it cannot — and should never ­— be able to
determine public policy by itself. On a complex issue like climate change, being right about science DOES NOT by
itself make somebody’s proposed public policy solutions infallible.”
– Eli Leher, President, R Street
“We need to win back the science, but we will – that’s the easy part. The more difficult question is whether we win
back the principle that if the science is valid, public policy action is morally mandatory ...”
– Ed Markey, U.S. Representative for Massachusetts’s 5th congressional district
“We need to be open to the probability that the new conversation might not start with a scientific lecture.”
– Cathy Duvall, National Political Director, Sierra Club
10
11
Voices from the Community
Q4
What should the climate
engagement community do to
build political will for climate
action? (2 of 2)
Make it personal and highlight local impacts.
“We need to make the issue local and regional, not national and global. It has to be about personally relevant
realities not abstract scientific extrapolations.”
– Robert Perkowitz, President, ecoAmerica
“Americans need to understand that climate change is affecting them and their families now in order for them to
be persuaded to take action now ...”
– Angela Anderson, Director, Climate and Energy Program, Union of Concerned Scientists
Move away from
social marketing
toward democratic
engagement.
Recognize people’s
emotional and
psychological
reactions.
“Communication efforts should be focused
on engaging citizens in a dialogue, not
in manipulation. To build movement
mobilization, there is a need for a face
to face engagement and discussion. Just
providing information might lead to short
term shifts in opinion, but it also means
engaging in continual spin wars.”
“… accepting the reality of climate change,
deliberating about its relevance, and determining
a course of action can be emotionally and
psychologically difficult for people, yet most
outreach efforts to date have not recognized this
area of complexity.”
– Robert Brulle, Professor, Drexel University,
Department of Culture & Communication
“View engagement broadly, including all
ways of interacting with people who might
choose to act on climate-related issues, if
they saw a means for meaningful action.”
– Baruch Fischoff, Professor,
Carnegie Mellon University, Departments of Social
& Decision Sciences and Engineering
& Public Policy
– Cara Pike, Director, Climate Access
“The primary determinants of concern and
support for climate action lie in the anxieties,
fears, and aspirations people hold regarding
how well we can meet these challenges.
Acknowledgment of potential anxieties,
aspirations and ambivalence about these issues is
critical for disarming defenses and fostering more
openness.”
– Renee Lertzman, Strategic Communications
Consultant and Adjunct Faculty, Royal Roads University
“Until, and unless, climate change is perceived as a ‘present threat,’ most people simply won’t care — because
they believe that we will eventually figure out a solution...”
– Jeff Nesbit, Executive Director, Climate Nexus
“...we need to demonstrate costly near-term impacts to local areas (storm damage, insurance rates, agricultural
impacts, municipal budget costs, etc.) ...”
– Keith Gaby, Communications Director, Climate Campaign, Environmental Defense Fund
Stop trying to
convince people
that climate change
is threatening their
personal lives.
“One big mistake organizations can make today
would be to believe that the public will become
more concerned about climate change if people
can be convinced that climate change’s effects
will alter their own personal lives or will affect the
regions in which they live.”
– Jon Krosnick, Professor of Communication, Political
Science, & Psychology, Stanford University
Connect the dots
between impacts and
mitigation policy.
“... people are starting to experience climate impacts
locally in certain parts of the country … The
challenge is that many people are not connecting
the dots between those impacts and the need for
them to actively engage with their national leaders.“
– Jennifer Morgan, Director,
Climate and Energy Program, World Resources Institute
“Quite simply, climate change IS far less of an
immediate concern than issues like having a job,
taking care of one’s family, and participating in
one’s community.”
– Eli Lehrer, President, R Street
12
13
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
Composite of polls
Public belief in climate change
Public concern over climate change
50%
Key highlights:
• National polls indicate that the majority of Americans believe that climate change
is a problem, that it is at least partially human-caused, and that we should do
something about it.
• National polls fail to document any significant trend in public opinion on the reality
of climate change. Concern, however, peaked in 2007, fell when the economy
collapsed, and has not yet fully recovered.
• Some national polls indicate that increasing concerns about climate change are
correlated with extreme weather events.
• The findings on willingness to pay for climate action were mixed depending on
how the question was worded.
• National polls show a growing stark partisan divide on opinions around climate
change.
• There is little data of the trends in belief or concern within narrower geographies or
specific segments of populations. This is largely because most of the more targeted
surveys have been undertaken more sporadically and are thus difficult to compile
to track trends.
14
45%
00
20
0.60
Climate Change Threat Index
We contracted The Strategy Team, Ltd. to summarize the existing survey and polling
data on public opinion and concerns about climate change, most of which track
national studies. The complete Strategy Team report is available upon request. In
addition, we conducted our own assessment of the current understanding of public
opinion among climate outreach specialists and advocates. Figure 4 documents the
trends in some of the national polls. Below are a few additional highlights from the
literature (references available in Sources and Methods).
02
20
04
20
06
08
20
20
12
10
20
10
20
20
Climate Change Threat Index
A Measure of U.S. Public Concern
Over Climate Change
0.55
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
08
20
20
20
12
The above figures show various measures
“Six Americas”
of U.S. public opinion and concern
100%
over climate change. The top graph is
Dismissive
adapted from research by The Strategy
Doubtful
Team, Ltd., which combined numerous
75%
Disengaged
polls to produce these averages. The
middle graph, which is adapted from
Cautious
50%
Brulle et al. 2011, shows the “Climate
Threat Index,” another combination of
Concerned
25%
indicators of public concern. Higher
values indicate more concern. The bottom
Alarmed
graph, from the Yale Project on Climate
09
11 2012
10
20
20
20
Change Communication (Leiserowtiz
2013), depicts the “Six Americas,” which
divides the U.S. public into segments based on their level of concern over climate
change. See Sources and Methods for complete description.
Percent of Americans
What do polls and surveys
say about what Americans
believe about climate
change?
Percent of Americans
Q5
Figure 4. U.S. Public Opinion and Climate Change
Q6
What does the social science
literature say about what drives
public opinion on climate change?
Figure 5. Sources from Scientific Literature Review
5a. Authors Cited
Based on a survey of the literature conducted by The Strategy Team, Ltd. we identified
several factors that seem to contribute to differences in public opinion. The full Strategy
Team report is available upon request. Figures 5a and 5b illustrate which authors and
scientific journals appeared most frequently in this survey of several hundred scientific
articles.
We share highlights that emerge from this literature not to provide definitive answers,
but rather to spark thinking and generate discussion about how social research can
inform engagement and outreach specialists, and what advocates might prioritize for
future social science research.
Key highlights (See Sources and Methods for sources):
• Party identification and political ideology are closely associated with climate
change beliefs.
5b. Journals Cited
• Demographics may explain some of the differences in opinion:
• Women tend to be more aware of and concerned about climate change and
more willing to do something about it.
• Younger Americans tend to be more aware of and concerned about climate
change.
• People with higher levels of education tend to have greater awareness of and
more concern about climate change.
• Differences in religious beliefs, in some studies, are associated with differences
in climate change attitudes. Some research suggests that less religious individuals
are more likely to believe climate change is happening.
• Some studies suggest that experiencing extreme weather can strengthen people’s
belief in climate change and their support for climate policies.
• Cognitive and personality traits often influence climate change beliefs. Some
studies suggest that:
• People who think their own or others’ actions can make a difference tend to be
more concerned about climate change.
• Individuals with egalitarian (instead of hierarchical) attitudes are more likely to
express concern about climate change.
16
These two “word cloud” figures show the frequency that specific authors or journals
were cited in the literature review prepared by The Strategy Team, Ltd. on the
public opinion of climate change in the United States. In Figure 5a, the largest
names, Leiserowitz and Krosnick, each authored or co-authored 17 articles, while
the smallest names authored or co-authored one article. In Figure 5b, the largest
journal, Climatic Change, was responsible for 25 of the science papers, while the
smallest journals accounted for one paper each.
Voices from the Community
Q7
What does the public engagement
community say about what drives
opinion on climate change?
The extent to which people
fear climate change.
“The motivating force for protective action is either a routine
norm (such as the purchase of fire insurance) or the emotional
arousal of fear and dread. The threat of global warming is too
abstract and remote to evoke dread and fear.”
– Daniel Kahneman, Professor, Princeton University,
Woodrow Wilson School of Public & International Affairs
“It’s not a concern to most people because it doesn’t have
obvious immediate consequences and the future consequences
are, by definition, not knowable in great detail.”
– Eli Lehrer, President, R Street
The economy.
“The major determinants are economic (GDP growth and
unemployment). These issues crowd out concern regarding
climate change.”
– Robert Brulle, Professor, Drexel University,
Department of Culture & Communication
“The Great Recession busted us to the bottom of Maslow’s
hierarchy of needs. In the pain of the Great Recession we’ve
been focused on this month’s mortgage payment and this
month’s paycheck, and climate change has been seen as an
issue that can wait.”
– Bob Inglis, former U.S. Representative
for South Carolina’s 4th congressional district
How climate
messages are
received.
“Americans’ commitments related to
climate reflect their abiding concerns
(family, faith, community, livelihood),
as informed by everything that they
hear, see, and feel on related topics.”
– Baruch Fischoff, Professor, Carnegie
Mellon University, Departments of
Social & Decision Sciences and
Engineering & Public Policy
“… beliefs about climate change are
culturally polarized … climate change
has become so entangled in partisan
meanings that people view opposing
positions as badges of loyalty to
antagonistic groups.”
– Dan Kahan, Professor, Yale Law School,
The Cultural Cognition Project
“People need to feel a personal
connection to the issue that is
consistent with their core moral
concerns. Second, they need a
framework for articulation of that
concern that makes sense for them
within their existing religious, social,
and political contexts.”
– Alycia Ashburn, Director,
Creation Care Campaign, Sojourners
18
We don’t really know.
“Just above 50% [of Americans] believe that the earth is warming, and that future warming will pose serious
problems to the nation and the world. We do not have solid social scientific evidence documenting the reasons for
public uncertainty and the bases for public perceptions about the severity of the threat.”
– Jon Krosnick, Professor of Communication, Political Science, & Psychology, Stanford University
It depends on what
people believe it means
for them, here and now.
“What’s it mean for me and my family and my
community (physical or social)? And the ‘it’ in
the phrase can mean both the ‘problem’ and the
‘solution.’”
– Kevin Curtis, Chief Program & Advocacy Officer,
Climate Reality Project
“Americans used to see climate change as
something in the future: Out of sight, out of mind.
Now it is hitting their hometowns, their loved ones,
their wallets. As an abstract problem becomes real,
public support for action rises.”
– Eric Pooley, Senior Vice President for Strategy and
Communications, Environmental Defense Fund
“Increasing concern about climate change …
is directly attributable to the local and regional
impacts of climate change happening now all
across America. They are changing the issue from a
distant, abstract concept, decades in the future, to a
personally relevant issue now.”
– Robert Perkowitz, President, ecoAmerica
“With climate chaos sweeping the country, and
worsening year by year, this is becoming personal
for all Americans. Soon, they’ll demand protection
against further impacts of climate change they are
seeing, feeling, and paying dearly for, and they’ll
expect action.”
– Jake Thompson, Senior Press Secretary,
Natural Resources Defense Council
Whether people
understand that the
problem is real and
the consequences
are serious.
“People don’t understand the seriousness of
the issue and have been led to believe that the
science is still undecided.”
– The Rev. Canon Sally G. Bingham, President,
The Regeneration Project
“Americans’ lack of concern about climate change
stems not only from the well-known complexities
of the phenomenon, but from a 25-year-old
disinformation campaign that has effectively
spread doubt about climate science.”
– Riley E. Dunlap, Chair,
American Sociological Association’s Task Force on
Sociology and Global Climate Change
“The riddle is why a significant minority of
Americans diverge from the consensus … The
main reason seems to be the active campaign to
dispute and discredit the science ...”
– Paul Stern, Director, Committee on the Human
Dimensions of Global Change, National
Academy of Sciences
“’The big five’ determinants are people’s beliefs
that: it’s real; it’s us (i.e., it’s human caused); it’s
bad (i.e., it affects people and other things we
care about); scientists agree; and there’s hope
(i.e., it’s solvable).”
– Edward Maibach, Professor, George Mason University
and Director, Center for Climate Change Communication
19
Q8
How do NGOs use polling
and social science
in their outreach and
advocacy?
The Skoll Global Threats Fund conducted informal interviews with representatives
from about three dozen NGOs and a number of social science researchers. We also
contracted Climate Nexus to lead a formal assessment of how social science and
polling are currently being used by advocates (full report available upon request).
Highlights from both of these research efforts are provided below, and a few voices
from the community on this topic are shared on the following page.
Key highlights:
• NGOs and funders are actively supporting polling, focus groups, and values
surveys. Most of these efforts are associated with specific campaigns or policy
battles.
• Sharing polling and survey results across the community is limited, mostly
informal, and very uneven.
• There is significant concern that many groups perform similar surveys, thus
unnecessarily duplicating efforts.
Q9
How can social science
help strengthen climate
engagement efforts?
Help understand what
is working and what is
not.
Move beyond
polling.
“We need in-depth research. We have a lot
of polling — most of it either leaning towards
a conclusion or designed to sell a specific
strategy. But understanding how to engage the
public requires a bigger body of knowledge...”
“[Social scientists] could help with the design and
evaluation of engagements, drawing on all the research,
informed by knowledge of its strengths and limits.”
– Baruch Fischoff, Professor, Carnegie Mellon University
Departments of Social & Decision Sciences and
Engineering & Public Policy
– Frances Beinecke, President,
Natural Resources Defense Council
“Don’t guess … about what to do; treat insights … as
hypotheses … then observe, measure, and report the
actual effect of strategies you use. ”
“The limitation of polling/surveys ... is that
they take a snapshot of ‘where the public is’
... And tell us less about how we move key
segments from point A to point B.”
– Dan Kahan, Professor, Yale Law School,
The Cultural Cognition Project
– Suzanne Shaw, Director of Communications,
Union of Concerned Scientists
• Some suggested that the community relies too much on polling.
• There is a considerable appetite for improving the sharing of audience research
and investing in formal learning across the field.
Target research.
• Learning from polling is hampered by uneven experience with polling and the
lack of well-developed theories of change in which to locate the polling results.
“Research needs to be aimed at key groups that need persuasion, not just the national audience …”
• Public engagement efforts that are not tied to specific policy battles appear to
use national polls as a guide to shape their outreach and communication plans.
• There is some evidence that when social science research runs counter to
established advocacy strategies, advocates resist taking these findings into
account or acknowledging their importance.
– Ed Markey, U.S. Representative for Massachusetts’s 5th congressional district
Share, integrate, & translate.
“… We need to aggregate the stuff ... find a way to pull it together, turn it into a body of knowledge and
best practices.”
– Cathy Zoi, former Assistant Secretary of Energy and
former CEO of the Alliance for Climate Protection
“… there are a lot of great analytic tools that could make sophisticated research more useable for organizations
and issue campaigns.”
– Cathy Duvall, National Political Director, Sierra Club
20
21
Q10
What are constraints
to using social science
to strengthen climate
engagement?
Obstacles within the climate engagement
community
• The dominant focus on short-term opportunities to reduce carbon
emissions has discouraged advocates from taking a longer-term and more
evidence-based approach to building political will for large scale climate
solutions.
• Political and institutional barriers inhibit sharing and learning within the
community. These barriers result from differences in basic premises and
approaches among NGOs, which most organizations tend to hold strong,
and the proprietary nature of private research firms.
• Funders are reluctant to invest in long-term social change efforts and the
related research and experimentation needed for building political will.
• The current funding ecosystem discourages organizations from adopting
collaborative and evidence-abased approaches. Organizations feel
required to offer unique theories of change and approaches in a zero sum
funding environment. Experimenting and failing is not allowed.
22
Challenges embedded in the social science
community.
• National surveys and polls are of limited value to engagement programs.
Most long-term surveys are at a national level and not segmented by target
populations. These surveys provide limited value to inform or track climate
outreach and advocacy efforts.
• Targeted surveys and research are too expensive to scale at a level
commensurate with the needs of public engagement campaigns.
• Tracking progress in public engagement is tough. Outreach and advocacy
efforts to spur social change cannot be easily understood and tracked by
scientific methods.
• There is a disconnect between social scientists and the engagement
community. Social scientists are concerned that advocates don’t know what
is working. Meanwhile, advocates question if social science findings are
applicable, potentially contradictory, or already “conventional wisdom.”
• Incentives for researchers are not aligned with engagement priorities.
Academic social scientists are driven and rewarded to investigate questions
that tend to be disconnected from the climate community’s priorities.
Meanwhile, private researchers are largely motivated contract to contract,
rather than understanding the underlying driver and broader trends.
23
Q11
What are opportunities
for using social science
to strengthen climate
engagement?
Develop and use innovative tools and
methods.
The outreach and advocacy communities rely mostly on traditional polling
and survey methods to track public engagement on climate. However, political
campaigns and the private sector have developed new innovative tools and
methods in this area that may be applicable to climate engagement work.
Move beyond polls to guide engagement
programs.
Create sustained dialogue among climate outreach and advocacy
groups and diverse social scientists working on public engagement,
cognitive processes, and social movements. Nurture a context in which
measurement and admission of what didn’t work is rewarded, not
punished.
Enable social scientists to work with outreach specialists in designing and
evaluating engagement programs.
Create mechanisms and incentives for
sharing knowledge and information.
Experiment and test.
Share among individuals and organizations. Integrating the efforts of
funders, researchers, and advocates is an absolutely essential first step
towards enabling learning.
Integrate experiments in advocacy and communication campaigns so that
we can get feedback on what is working and what is not. Feedback loops
need to occur in real time so that multiple hypotheses and approaches can
be undertaken rapidly.
Translate and disseminate knowledge.
Ensure that social science research is synthesized and effectively translated to
inform climate engagement efforts.
24
Foster a culture of learning among
organizations.
Recognize that social change on climate
will take time.
Invest in efforts for long-term social change as well as short-term carbon
reductions.
25
Sources and Methods
The following studies, which we commissioned, are available upon request:
Cutting, H., Leombruni, L., Demassa, S. H. & Smithson-Stanely, L. Mapping the
Landscape of Audience Research for Climate Protection. Climate Nexus (2013).
A review of how NGOs are using social science, undertaken by Climate Nexus.
Pike, C., Hyde, K. Herr, M., Minkow, D. & Doppelt, B. Climate Communication and
Engagement Efforts: The Landscape of Approaches and Strategies. The Resource
Innovation Group’s Social Capital Project (2012).
A survey of climate organizations undertaken by the Resource Innovation Group’s
Social Capital Project. This survey catalogued 670 different organizations working
on climate issues, and it analyzed the theories of change that define (formally or
informally) these organizations’ climate communication efforts.
Kristel, O. V., Scott, A. L., Szymanski, A. M., & Berent, M. Assessing Survey Evidence
Regarding American Public Opinion Data About Climate Change. The Strategy Team,
Ltd. (2012).
An analysis of public opinion polls, also undertaken by The Strategy Team, Ltd.
This analysis took all available national polls and combined them to produce a
composite evaluation of what percent of the U.S. population believes climate
change is happening and is worried about its effects.
Szymanski, A. M., Scott, A. L., Anand, S. A. & Kristel, O. V. Assessing Social Science
Evidence Regarding American Public Opinion About Climate Change: Annotated
Bibliographies. The Strategy Team, Ltd. (2012).
An annotated bibliography of peer reviewed social science on U.S. public opinion
on climate change, undertaken by The Strategy Team, Ltd.
with a number of experts. The vertical axis charts whether the target audience is
political, economic, or social elites (grasstops) or the general public (grassroots). The
horizontal axis charts the relative amount of effort an organization puts into research
and analysis versus outreach and advocacy. Think tanks generally appear in the top
left, while pure grassroots advocacy groups are in the bottom right. In some cases
– especially in the top left corner – organizations should probably be placed in the
same location, but we spread them out to make the graphic easier to read. Note that
the ratio of the climate and energy budget to the total organization budget might, in
some cases, be skewed because we “bucketed” the climate and energy budgets (as
shown in the key), while the total budgets are directly proportional to the actual total
budget.
Q2. What motivators do NGOs use to engage people on climate and energy issues?
Our findings draw on analysis of Figure 2 (see description below).
Figure 2. Motivators for Climate and Energy Engagement
Drawing on the same 66 organizations, we then categorized the organizations based
on how they motivate the need to act on climate change. Do they emphasize the
impacts of climate change, the (non-climate) negative impacts of dirty energy, or the
benefits of clean energy? This chart was generated by reviewing each organization’s
website and consulting with external experts. Although nearly every organization
uses all three motivators to some degree, if it did not appear that a motivator
was a significant part of the organization’s messaging, then we did not place the
organization in the corresponding circle.
Q3. How are climate impacts framed in communication efforts?
These findings draw on an analysis of Figure 3 (see description below).
Q1. What does the climate engagement landscape look like?
Our findings are largely based on our own research and interviews. We created
Figure 1 (see description below) based on our research and review from a few
leaders in the community.
Figure 1. Climate Engagement Landscape
From a list of 190 climate organizations, we selected the 66 largest based on their
estimated climate and energy budget (see description below). We then placed
them on this diagram after reviewing each organization’s website and consulting
26
Figure 3. How NGOs Frame Climate Impacts
For the organizations that focus on climate impacts, we then performed a deeper
dive on how they frame these impacts. Do they focus on the costs to society or the
moral implications of climate impacts? For the largest organizations, we reviewed
the websites and consulted with experts. For the remaining organizations, we
drew on analysis by the Social Capital Project of the Resource Innovation Group.
This figure includes all the NGOs that focus on climate impacts and which were
on a list of NGOs provided for us by the Social Capital Project of the Resource
Innovation Group, and which we were able to find a budget for (see next section
for a description of this list). For instance, the figure excludes all the organizations
in Figure 2 that are not in the Risks of Climate Impacts circle, but it also includes
27
many smaller organizations that were not on Figures 1 and 2. Because we included
all groups, and because we wanted to highlight where the community is focused as
opposed to individual groups, we left the names organizations off the diagram. Note
that some organizations appear on both of the two Venn diagrams.
National polls show a growing stark partisan divide:
Borick, C. P., & Rabe, B. G. A reason to believe: Examining the factors that
determine individual views on global warming. Social Science Quarterly 91, 777-800
(2010).
Figures 1, 2, and 3: Estimated size of climate and energy budgets
Drawing on a list of about 280 NGOs provided by the Social Capital Project of the
Resource Innovation Group, we used public sources to find the annual budgets for
190 of the groups (the majority of the remaining groups had no budget or almost
no budget). Using the organizations’ 990 tax forms, annual reports, and websites,
we made an assessment of the percentage of each organization’s efforts that were
devoted to climate and energy issues. In some cases, especially with most of the
larger NGOs, this judgment was very clear. In other cases, especially with large
organizations with a small focus on climate change, the estimate is highly subjective.
Without detailed knowledge of the inside of the organizations, it is difficult to
obtain an exact figure. Nonetheless, we feel that our estimates are close enough to
make a highly informed diagram such as shown in Figures 1, 2, and 3. The list of
organizations and estimated climate budgets are available upon request.
Q4. What should the climate engagement community do to build political will for
climate action?
We asked members of the community this question, and compiled their responses.
A full compilation is available upon request. The quotes here are pulled from these
responses with slight edits for clarity.
Q5. What do polls and surveys say about what Americans believe about climate
change?
Some national polls indicate that extreme weather increases concern over climate
change:
Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Feinberg, G., & Howe, P. Extreme
Weather and Climate Change in the American Mind. Yale University and George
Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.
(2012).
Willingness to pay for climate action is mixed depending on how the questions were
worded:
Dietz, T., Dan, A. & Shwom, R. Support for Climate Change Policy: Social
Psychological and Social Structural Influences. Rural Sociology 72, 185–214 (2007).
Li, H. et al. Would developing country commitments affect US households’ support
for a modified Kyoto Protocol? Ecological Economics 48, 329–343 (2004).
28
McCright, A. M. & Dunlap, R. E. Cool dudes: The denial of climate change among
conservative white males in the United States. Global Environmental Change 21,
1163–1172 (2011).
Targeted surveys have been undertaken sporadically: based on our research and the
review by Climate Nexus.
Other findings for this question draw largely on the research performed by The Strategy
Team, Ltd., and Figure 4.
Figure 4. U.S. Public Opinion and Climate Change
This figure draws on research from three sources:
1. The top graph for figure 4 draws on analysis by The Strategy Team, Ltd. The
Strategy Team reviewed publicly available polling results on climate change
and public opinion, including searches on iPoll, general web searches, and
well-known websites. They curated 2,000 questions asked in 475 different
surveys, most of which were performed at the national level. They then
analyzed questions that asked whether Americans believed that climate change
is happening and whether they are concerned over it. The Strategy Team
analyzed how responses varied depending on the wording of questions, and
then produced an “average” of the polls that accounted for the fact that people
answer questions differently depending on the wording. The two lines shown on
this graph thus are better at showing changes in opinion than absolute opinion,
as they don’t correspond to a specific question.
2. The middle graph for figure 4 is adapted from Brulle et al (2011) (see full citation
below), which drew on data from 74 separate surveys over a nine-year period to
develop a quarterly measure of public concern over climate change. They use a
statistical method (described in the paper) to compare different polls and create
a single index of concern. Increases in the index reflect an increase in public
concern over climate change.
Brulle, R., Carmichael, J. & Jenkins, J. Shifting public opinion on climate change:
an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in
the U.S., 2002–2010. Climatic Change 1–20 doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0403-y
3. The bottom chart for figure 4 is adapted from a 2013 report by the Yale Project
on Climate Change Communication (see below). The Yale Project, starting in
2008, has surveyed the U.S. population and divided it into six “segments” that
correspond to people’s level of concern and engagement in climate change,
ranging from the “alarmed,” who believe climate change is a serious and
29
imminent threat, to the “dismissive,” who believe climate change is a hoax.
Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Feinberg, G. & Howe, P. Global
Warming’s Six Americas, September 2012. Yale University and George Mason
University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication
(2013).
Higher education levels correlate with higher concern:
Q6. What does the social science literature say about what drives public opinion on
climate change?
Hamilton, L. C. Education, politics and opinions about climate change evidence for
interaction effects. Climatic Change 104, 231–242 (2011).
Party identification and political ideology are very well correlated with belief in climate
change:
Hindman, D. B. Mass Media Flow and Differential Distribution of Politically
Disputed Beliefs: The Belief Gap Hypothesis. Journalism & Mass Communication
Quarterly 86, 790–808 (2009).
Hamilton, L. C. Education, politics and opinions about climate change evidence for
interaction effects. Climatic Change 104, 231–242 (2011).
McCright, A. M. & Dunlap, R. E. Cool dudes: The denial of climate change among
conservative white males in the United States. Global Environmental Change 21,
1163–1172 (2011).
Rugeley, C. R. & Gerlach, J. D. Understanding Environmental Public Opinion by
Dimension: How Heuristic Processing Mitigates High Information Costs on Complex
Issues. Politics & Policy 40, 444–470 (2012).
Women are more concerned than men:
Brody, S., Grover, H. & Vedlitz, A. Examining the willingness of Americans to alter
behaviour to mitigate climate change. Climate Policy 12, 1–22 (2012).
Kahn, M. E. & Kotchen, M. J. Environmental Concern and the Business Cycle: The
Chilling Effect of Recession. (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2010).at <http://
www.nber.org/papers/w16241>
McCright, A. M. The effects of gender on climate change knowledge and concern in
the American public. Popul Environ 32, 66–87 (2010).
Owen, A. L., Conover, E., Videras, J. & Wu, S. Heat Waves, Droughts, and
Preferences for Environmental Policy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 31,
556–577 (2012).
Saad, Lydia. “To Americans, the risks of global warming are not imminent.” Gallup
Poll (2007).
Younger Americans are more aware and concerned:
Hindman, D. B. Mass Media Flow and Differential Distribution of Politically
Disputed Beliefs: The Belief Gap Hypothesis. Journalism & Mass Communication
Quarterly 86, 790–808 (2009).
30
Kellstedt, P. M., Zahran, S. & Vedlitz, A. Personal Efficacy, the Information
Environment, and Attitudes Toward Global Warming and Climate Change in the
United States. Risk Analysis 28, 113–126 (2008).
Relationships between income and concern:
Dietz, T., Dan, A. & Shwom, R. Support for Climate Change Policy: Social
Psychological and Social Structural Influences. Rural Sociology 72, 185–214 (2007).
Li, H. et al. Would developing country commitments affect US households’ support
for a modified Kyoto Protocol? Ecological Economics 48, 329–343 (2004).
Michaud, K. E. The good steward: The impact of religion on climate change views.
Conference Papers -- Western Political Science Association, 1-26 (2009).
Williams, A. E. Media evolution and public understanding of climate science. Politics
and the Life Sciences 30, 20–30 (2011).
Relationships between religion and concern:
Hamilton, L. C. & Keim, B. D. Regional variation in perceptions about climate
change. International Journal of Climatology 29, 2348–2352 (2009).
McCright, A. M. & Dunlap, R. E. Cool dudes: The denial of climate change among
conservative white males in the United States. Global Environmental Change 21,
1163–1172 (2011).
Michaud, K. E. The good steward: The impact of religion on climate change views.
Conference Papers -- Western Political Science Association, 1-26 (2009).
Williams, A. E. Media evolution and public understanding of climate science. Politics
and the Life Sciences 30, 20–30 (2011).
Relationships between extreme weather and concern:
Joireman, J., Barnes Truelove, H. & Duell, B. Effect of outdoor temperature, heat
primes and anchoring on belief in global warming. Journal of Environmental
31
Psychology 30, 358–367 (2010).
Krosnick, J. A., Holbrook, A. L., Lowe, L. & Visser, P. S. The Origins and
Consequences of democratic citizens’ Policy Agendas: A Study of Popular Concern
about Global Warming. Climatic Change 77, 7–43 (2006).
Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Feinberg, G., & Howe, P. Extreme
Weather and Climate Change in the American Mind. Yale University and George
Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.
(2012).
Owen, A. L., Conover, E., Videras, J. & Wu, S. Heat Waves, Droughts, and
Preferences for Environmental Policy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 31,
556–577 (2012).
People who think their own or others’ actions can make a difference tend to be more
concerned about climate change:
Kellstedt, P. M., Zahran, S. & Vedlitz, A. Personal Efficacy, the Information
Environment, and Attitudes Toward Global Warming and Climate Change in the
United States. Risk Analysis 28, 113–126 (2008).
Zahran, S., Brody, S. D., Grover, H. & Vedlitz, A. Climate Change Vulnerability and
Policy Support. Society & Natural Resources 19, 771–789 (2006).
change is happening and others do not, and why some people want action on
climate change and some don’t. The result was over 200 articles, which are listed
in their annotated bibliography (available upon request). The word clouds were
developed using wordle.net.
Q7. What does the public engagement community say about what drives opinion on
climate change?
We asked members of the community this question, and compiled their responses.
A full compilation is available upon request. The quotes here are pulled from these
responses with slight edits for clarity.
Q8. How do NGOs use polling and social science in their outreach and advocacy?
This question draws largely on the report by Climate Nexus, as well as interviews
performed by the Skoll Global Threats Fund with representatives from NGOs,
research institutions, and foundations.
Q9. How can social science help strengthen climate engagement efforts?
The quotes here are pulled from conversations we’ve had with scientists, advocates,
and other leaders in the community working on public engagement and climate
change. A full compilation is available upon request.
Q10. What are constraints to using social science to strengthen climate engagement?
Individuals with egalitarian (instead of hierarchical) attitudes are more likely to express
concern for climate change:
Bord, Richard J., Ann Fisher, and Robert E. O’Connor. Public perceptions of global
warming: United States and international perspectives. Climate Research 11, 75-84
(1998).
Kahan, D. M., Jenkins-Smith, H. & Braman, D. Cultural cognition of scientific
consensus. Journal of Risk Research 14, 147–174 (2010).
These emerged from our discussions and research, including the research done by
partners and contracted organizations.
Q11. What are opportunities for using social science to strengthen climate
engagement?
These emerged from our discussions and research, including the research done by
partners and contracted organizations.
Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E. W., Roser-Renouf, C., Smith, N. & Dawson, E.
Climategate, Public Opinion, and the Loss of Trust. (Social Science Research
Network, 2010). at http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1633932
Figure 5. Sources from Scientific Literature Review
These two “word clouds” show the frequency that authors or journals were cited
in the literature review performed by The Strategy Team, Ltd. The Strategy Team
reviewed nearly a dozen academic databases for published social science literature
on U.S. public opinion and climate change. They searched for articles that studied
how U.S. public opinion has changed over time, why some people are concerned
about climate change and others are not, why some people believe that climate
32
33
What does the climate engagement landsc
ook like? What motivators do NGOs use
o engage people on climate and energy
ssues? How are climate impacts framed
n climate communications efforts? What
should climate engagement efforts do to
build political will for climate action? Wha
polls and surveys say about what America
believe about climate change? What does
he social science literature say about wh
drives public opinion on climate change?
What does the climate community say abo
what drives public engagement on climate
change? How do NGOs use polling and soc
science in their outreach and advocacy?
How could social science be used to help
strengthen climate engagement efforts?
What are constraints for enhancing the us
of social science research and methods to
strengthen climate engagement? What are
opportunities for enhancing the use of soc
science research and methods to strength
climate engagement? What does the clima
engagement landscape look like? What mo